On one side is the Internet user known as Wu
Fatian. His real name is Wu Danhong, and he is an assistant professor of
law at the China University of Political Science and Law in Beijing. He describes himself as
an amateur in debunking fakery, busting rumors, explaining the law
and defending rights. He says that he will tell the truth no matter how
unpleasant that might be. This is the self-description on his microblog.

On the other side, there is "This is Yan Yun".
Her real name is Zhou Yan, and she is a reporter on for Sichuan TV.
Here is the self-description on her mcirblog.

The incident began this way with these
exchanges:

(Translaiton)
Wu Fatian: I ask Fang Zhouzi to teach us about the science and/or dispel the
rumors: Does the copper alloy project pollute the environment?
Molybdenum copper and other elements are essentially present in the bodies of
humans and plants. The molydenum copper resources are being processed
using the most advanced technology and equipment available internationally.
After recycle processing, there is "zero pollution." All waste products
are processed and re-used without affecting the environment.
Internet user comment: To say something like this at this moment is to invite
being torched by lightning? Will those who go against the people's will
be finished?
This is Yan Yun: I can't believe that fucking Wu Fatian wouldn't be beaten
into a pulp if he were to go out.

This incident continued with this statement
from Wu Fatian:

(Translation) Due to a difference of opinion through microblogs, the Sichuan
TV reporter Zhou Yan has been hailing invectives at me on several occasions.
I refused to tolerate this and I replied in kind. As a result, she has
challenged me. I do not know this female intellectual. Today, I
checked the records and I saw that she was among the list of reporters who
spread rumors on microblogs, and she has appeared in photos with other
renowned microblog public intellectuals. She is also a fan of Zhang Ming
and Li Zhuang. Tomorrow should be a good day to popularize legal
knowledge. Let the slimy people be aware: those who obey the law have
nothing to fear; instead they cause fear among lawbreakers!

This challenge was accepted by Zhou Yan:

(Translation) I sincerely welcome China University of Political Science and
Law professor Wu Fatian to
discuss the law at South Gate (Main Gate) in Chaoyang Park. I repeat:
Don't stay away, be there on time.

Here are the three photos:

Thus, the appointment was made. But
before the actual encounter, there was more verbal sparring.

Internet user comment to Wu Fatian: Little Tiantian, there are many pretty
photos of Yan Yuan on her microblog. So why do you pick not-so-pretty
photos, and you even picked a photo when she was hospitalized for a serious
illness. This shows that you are slimy. As for those who criticize Yan Yuan's looks, I can tell you that Yan Yuan is very pretty, sharp and
pleasing. Every smile of her is enchanting. Don't Bridget Lin and
Maggie Cheung have bad photos too? Why don't you people look in the mirror?
According to your own standards, shouldn't you people drop dead?
"This is Yan Yun": This shows what Wu Fatian's motives and character are like.

Internet user comment to Wu Fatian: Are you
jealous of how pretty Zhou Yan is?
Wu Fatian: I am not jealous. I don't rate other people on looks.
Someone says that it is a violation of image rights to post those photos.
That is a joke. She posted those photos on her own microblog. I
have not made her look ugly and I am not profiting from this. So which
laws are being broken?

Internet user comment to Wu Fatian: It does not matter who is right or wrong.
It is unfair for a guy to fight a woman. So you can skip the appointment
because it is inappropriate to fight with a woman.
Wu Fatian: Don't worry. This will be a war of words, not a war of force.
I guarantee that I will go, I guarantee that I will hold a rational debate
and I guarantee that I will not fight with a woman. I will discuss all
the controversial topics. Internet user friends can come and videotape.

Internet user microblog: A "universal values camp" pretty woman once debated
with me in a coffee shop. I won my points again and again, and she lost
her points again and again. She began to raise her voice, thus drawing
the attention of those around us. She recommended that we switch to
a different location. So we continued our debate in a hotel room.
As we came out, I asked her: "Are the universal values of the United States of
America so good?" She laughed and said: "I just listen to other people's
babbling. Stop kidding me." Now I see that a pretty woman has
made an
appointment with Wu Fatian. I wish Brother Wu the best of luck.
Wu Fatian: A certain Sichuan TV reporter invites me to have a "contest" on
Friday afternoon. I hope that the other party have the demeanor for a
debate. When I teach, I won't tire even if I talk for three days.
If there isn't enough time that afternoon, we can continue to debate over
drinks. Spectators help themselves.

Wu Fatian: There is a rumor that you can become popular if you curse out Wu
Fatian; and if you arrange a fight with him, you can become immensely popular.
This type of bad rumor is seductive to the various demons and devils just as saying
that the Tang Monk's flesh is good to eat. Sometimes I wonder if I
should take pity on these democracy-freedom folks so that they will have the
opportunity to show off their Cultural Revolution manners, as well as as let
the spectators see the demons who wear the masks of public intellectuals for
what
they really are. On this occasion, the one who wants to eat the flesh of
the Tang Monk is a female Sichuan TV reporter. I may just sacrifice
myself a bit.

Now we arrive on the fateful day. Here
are some of the reports.

The time is 12:45. The principal "This is Yan Yun" has arrived, but Wu
Fatian hasn't arrived yet.

Famous microbloggers such as Wuyue Shanren, Yi Tian and others were at the
scene to offer support to "This is Yan Yun."

At 12:56, Wu Fatian arrived. Then the big
brawl started.

Here is Wu Fatian's own account of the
incident:

Wu Fatian: Thirty to forty persons. Most of them men. They
systematically surrounded and assaulted me, who is a mere scholar. I did
not fight back at all. I am injured all over my body. The Sichuan
TV reporter Zhou Yan and Ai Weiwei himself took part and attacked me. The
video will record what this episode from the Cultural Revolution looked like.

Here is "This is Yan Yun"'s account of the
incident:

Internet user "Bacanghai" comment: To "This is Yan Yun": Sister, the
colleagues from our entire department are supporting you from in front of our
computers!
"This is Yan Yun": Forward to my colleagues: two eggs on the face, three kicks
to the back, three kicks to the lower body; soft; did not find out the
results; too big a scene; the police and armed police are here; I withdrew
intact and unscathed; I did not lose face for the young and old men of
Sichuan!

Internet user "Bacanghai" comment: The office is
filled with the voices of the workers. Congratulations to Sichuan TV's
victory!

I did not pay much attention about the
meeting between Wu Fatian and Zhou Yan. I even made several jokes in
tease. Today at noon, I put aside my work and I went to South Gate,
Chaoyang Park. I had wanted to meet Wu Fatian all along. Although
I studied law, I have not been involved in legal work and I am rusty.
Recently a friend of mine ran into big trouble overseas and I wanted an expert
opinion. Wu did not reply to my email, and I could not very well go to
see him at the China University of Political Science and Law. So I
wanted to take this chance to meet with him. Because I was not yet
hungry, I did not have lunch. When I got there, it was already after
12:30. It was drizzling. I walked around with an umbrella hand.
Because of the rain, there were not many people near the park gate.

There was an outdoor store nearby. I
waited inside for a while. At 12:55, I came out and immediately I heard
crowd noise near the park entrance. I hurried over, and I saw a totally
unexpected scene. A large group of people (and they emerged suddenly
because they were not there before) surrounded Wu Fatian and cursed him.
I heard shouts of "XX dog!!" "Hit him!" "Slap him!" Then someone rushed
up to hit Wu Fatian who fell down on the ground. I was astonished.
How did a debate turn into a brawl? Wu Fatian got up. But those
people did not let off and continued to surround him, curse him and beat him.
Without realizing it, I rushed it to defend Wu Fatian. I shouted loudly,
"Don't hit him! Don't hit him!" Nobody listened. People kept
rushing up and cursing him while pointing fingers at his nose. Another
sneaky fellow kicked him in the back. I screened one side but I could
screen the other side. It was a tight situation, but there was nothing
much I could do except to ask people not to help him.

Someone kept howling: "Wu Fatian, you dare to
hit a woman. I won't stop with you." I thought that this person
must be blind, because this woman was leading a group of people to assault Wu
Fatian. I was perplexed by the number of cameras in acdtion at the
scene. These were not the family variety digital video cameras, because
there were black professional cameras hoisted on shoulder. Who were
these people?

During the chaos, I felt a sudden pain in my
back. Fuck, someone hit me with a brick so hard that the brick broke
apart. I turned around and grabbed the guy. But it was too chaotic
and I could not handcuff him. Besides there were loud noises around Wu
Fatian and I was worried about him. So I let loose a bit and the guy who
hit me struggled free and quickly fled in democracy-like manner. I
ignored the pain and I went back. At that moment, the female principal
Zhou Yan was pointing her finger at Wu Fatian and cursing him out loud.
Maybe she was not content with cursing, because she rushed up to kick Wu
Fatian. I rushed up between them to intercede. I backed up under
her assault and I kept repeating: "Don't fight! Don't fight!"
Someone grabbed me and pulled away. I was kicked repeatedly on my legs
and thighs. I was face to face with a person and we shouted angrily at
each other. His face was next to mine. I am sure that this person
did not study beyond junior high school, and he may not read microblogs.
I really don't know why he hated Wu Fatian so much.

During the entire assault, Wu Fatian did not
fight back. He kept retreating. The crowd circled him on the steps
and by the curbside. Somehow we ended up in front of the iron railing of
the front gate. I wanted to stay there, because I don't have to worry
about people sneaking up from behind. I can anticipate the attacks from
the front, but I cannot know the attacks from behind. But we could not
hold our positions. They kept cursing and rushing us while swinging
their fists. So we kept retreating.

A 16-year-old who claimed to be from Canada
was the most aggressive. He shouted loudly but it was mostly empty talk.
He must have been well taught by the public intellectuals. This young
man rushed fiercely at us. I could even see his nostril hairs. His
face was red from excitement, and he was foaming in the mouth. His
saliva flew into my face. Frankly, it was quite disgusting even if the
saliva came from a democratic country. I found it somewhat unbearable so
I asked which of Wu Fatian's microblog post was rumor? He was at a loss
of words, but he quickly abandoned any attempt to debate and resort to howling
and roaring!

Wu Fatian explained futilely: "She cursed me
out many times first. I never said that nobody starved to death during
the hard times. You are distorting ---" But it was useless.
Nobody wanted to listen to his explanations. Nobody was interested in
what he had to say. They were much more interested in applying a punch
or kick to him. I kept being punched and kicked, so I imagined that Wu
Fatian must have been hit too. There were curses all around. They
chanted in unison: "Wu Fatian! Big stupid cunt!" Their rhythm was
uniform and their cadences were in step as if they had rehearsed it
beforehand. By this time, I was panting from the effort. Fuck, it
is said to be middle-aged and it is impossible to have democracy without being
in good physical shape.

And then a new climax arrived. A fat
man appeared. This is the legendary Fat Man Ai. Where did come
from? Where was he hiding before? He seemed to have come from
nowhere. I did not see him at all before. The Fat Man went up to
Wu Fatian and shouted: "Do you see who I am?" or something like that. I
did not hear what he said because I was still astonished by his sudden
appearance. The Fat Man did not stop with speaking, for he rushed up and
gave Wu Fatian a big slap. The people were excited and shouted out
louder. I don't know if the Fat Man's slap stirred the crowd up, or
whether they wanted to take advantage of the chaos. Wu Fatian was
knocked down on the ground again. Many feet rushed in. I was
worried that Professor may be trampled to death. So I hurried to help
him get up and I encouraged him: "Get up, don't fall down before them."
Wu Fatian's eyeglasses were knocked off. I helped him to leave. I
knew that they had plotted this long ago, or else the Fat Man would not have
shown up. I told Wu Fatian: "Leave, leave, this is pointless."

The people around us chased us and yelled.
We retreated to the roadside. I was at the end of my strength. I
was panting hard. I didn't know how much longer I could hold up. I
didn't know what they really wanted. A man hoisting a camera kept
chasing us and telling me repeatedly: "I am not hitting you. I am
not hitting you." But there was no way for an interview to take place.
I thought that these people are tasting blood and they are ready to pounce on
us again. Am I going to be a martyr here today? Wu Fatian was
injured in multiple places. His nose was bleeding, his hand was
scratched. Worse yet, my shirt had a bloodstain. He must have bled
on my shirt. After this is over, I am going to ask him to pay for the
dry-cleaning.

Finally, the police showed up. They
separated the crowd and began to question people. I looked around.
I was puzzled that the Canadian young man who charged up to me, the guy who
stood face to face with me, and Ms. Zhou Yan had all disappeared. Even
more strange was that Fat Man Ai had vanished completely just as surprising as
his appearance. I admire these people for being able to act so quickly.
In retrospect, Fat Man Ai seemed to have the style of those student leaders 23
years ago when I was also in the movement. When they need to show up,
they show up; when they need to leave, they leave. They just float away
without disturbing anything.

As the police questioned Wu Fatian, my legal
professionalism took over and I went over to pick up the brick which had made
intimate contact with my back. At that moment, I got an after-scare.
If this brick had hit me on the back of the head, I might be done for.
The police chased away the spectators, and things grew quieter around us.
I went into the police car to sit down. I was very sorry that I did not
have lunch first.

There were many ecstatic spectators taking
photos of us with their mobile phones. When I saw their faces, I was
reminded the essay by Lu Xun about the cold-blooded Chinese spectators.
Worse yet, these people had planned to be there. They did not plan to
hold any debate. They only wanted a brawl. When Wu Fatian spoke,
they hit him; when Wu Fatian did not speak, they hit him; when Wu Fatian
retreated, they hit him; when Wu Fatian fell down on the ground, they
continued to hit him. They wanted zealously to hit him.

The police took us to the Maizidian station
to take down statements. They asked Wu Fatian to go in first. Then
the other party also came. Apart from Ms. Zhou Yan, there were two men
and one woman. The woman wore eyeglasses and looked very refined.
I did not remember whether she was present at the scene, because it was very
chaotic. She kept writing on something like an Apple device, so I guess
that she must be making live microblog posts to publicize their feats. I
don't know how to access the Internet through a mobile phone, so I was unable
to appreciate their tallies. What a pity! The police went back and
forth and asked us to go over to make statements and answer questions. I
told the police that the brick was evidence because it was used to hit me.
When the refined woman across me heard that, she made a lovely bell-like
laugh. I don't know why she was so happy. I don't know her, but
she was very happy to hear that I was hit. She was so happy that I got
hit. It seemed that she was enjoying the happiness of the brick hitting
me, even though she could not be there at that moment. Are all democracy
lovers like that?

The police officers were astonished to see
the brick which broke into pieces They asked the medical examiner to
take photos of me. Although it happened three hours ago, the mark left
by the brick was still clearly visible. At the time, I did not feel
anything. But now the spots on my back, hip and legs which were kicked
and punched were starting to ache. The police wanted Wu Fatian to
undergo a medical examination. I suspected that his ears were injured,
because I found it hard to converse with him when we left the scene. I
had to either repeat myself or increase the volume. This was the first
time that I ever met Wu Fatian, and I was beaten up along with him. I
must be very unlucky.

A female Internet friend came in to see us.
She even brought a bouquet of flowers. Can she foretell the future?
Did she know that we would be beaten up? I thought that I was lucky
because the guy had smashed the brick on my back instead of the back of my
head, because a funeral wreath would be more appropriate then.

While awaiting for my statement to be taken
and the medical examination, I felt very tired and I fell asleep on the chair.
When it was all over, it was already dark. The news story had gone all
around the Internet by now. I did not know how to access the Internet
through a mobile phone, so I could not read the microblogs. I texted a
friend. He said that a fat guy was protecting Wu Fatian at the scene,
and he asked, "Was that you?" This broken my heart even worst than the
brick slapped on my back. Since when did I become a fat guy? Where
did that handsome man of yesteryear go?

Finally I made it home. When I thought
about the faces that I saw today, I felt only disgust. I don't know any
of those violent people could sleep well tonight. When they swung their
fists against the weak, they must feel an indescribable delight. I
graduated from law school, I believed in the law all my life, I believe in
facts and evidence, I believe in justice. Am I being too naïve?

For making this blog post, the Internet user
Huyanglin717 found that his identity, address and telephone number were
published by the Deutsche Welle reporter Su Yutong and forwarded by Ai Weiwei.

Here are the animated excerpts from the
videos. This is critical because there was much debate about whether Wu
Fatian was faking it or exaggerating the case. You can form your own
opinion.

If the microblogs should become the channel for setting up fights, it means
that verbal violence has escalated to physical violence. This is not
worthy for encouragement or advocacy!

With respect to the beating of Wu Fatian, I am shocked at the naïveté
of the Fifty Cent Gang. It would seem that the Fascists are more
practical in looking at the issues.

Han Han: A man insults a woman in public, and gladly agrees to go to an
appointment for a fight. Such a man deserves to be beaten. Since
this is World Kissing Day, he deserves to be beaten even more so. This
has nothing to do with public intellectuals, democracy or the Cultural
Revolution. There is no need to blame others and falsely claim to be
surrounded and beaten. Rolling on the ground is the sure sign of
someone faking it. It comes down simply to this: he deserves to be beaten.
This has nothing to do with democracy. Even if you are Jiang Jingguo,
you deserve to be beaten.

Zhang Fang: Since Han Han used "having insulted a woman" to publicly support
the attackers, we should investigate further as to see how many women that Han Han
has insulted, alright? Thanks.

Pan Shiyi: We should condemn all barbarity and violence.

"Tang Dynasty Wet Dream"|: A certain microblogger-public intellectual wanted
to set up a fight date with me. I agreed. My cousin advised me:
"Don't go. This guy said that it would be one-on-one, but he would surely
bring a lot of others. These bastards are always like that." I
said: "I am going alone." My cousin sighed: "I cannot dissuade you.
Okay, where are you meeting?" I laughed and said: "In Shifang, Sichuan."
My cousin paused for a moment and laughed out aloud: "Cousin, you are so
smart."

Wu Xingchuan: To the habitual rumor mongering shameless liar Lao Rong: You
claim to be an eyewitness who attest that Ai Weiwei did not hit anyone.
If you are a man, will you look at the photo and answer whether Ai Weiwei hit
anyone?

Peng Xiaoyun: Even in democratic countries, the opposition between scientism
and environmental protection, the disagreement between nationalism and
individualism and the debate between leftism and rightism will not disappear.
Street thugs use violence to decide who wins; intellectuals use meticulous
arguments to decide the outcomes of debates. In China, a bunch of
so-called intellectuals employ the methods of street thugs. I applaud
these thugs and hooligans.

Does winning a fight mean that you are right? This is jungle logic in
society. China is becoming increasingly progressive. It is
incomprehensible how so many so-called "righteous persons" are cheering.
Meanwhile I am increasingly convinced that Land Reform and/or Cultural
Revolution should recur every several decades. Do you think that anyone
engaged in the Land Reform or Cultural Revolution wasn't convinced that he was
"righteous"? Which one of them did not believe that he represents the
progressive forces of his times?

Sister, you beat him well!

It is usual to fight. Let him go and
get a medical examination. There was no way that he even suffered a mild
injury. You said that you hit him until he was hurting all over ...

I oppose the use of violence against those
who you disagree with. This is the same as the "armed fights" of the
Cultural Revolution. Back then during the armed fights, all the young
people were firmly convinced that their political views were completely
correct. China does not lack respect for democracy; it lacks respect for
the freedom of one's opponents.

Are you a hooligan or female reporter?
You are a lawless woman! Are you slapping the faces of the Sichuan
people, or the faces of reporters? You bring shame to your supporters
...

I object! This is too barbaric!
Too dreadful! These people even demand to have democracy, rule or law
and freedom! They have violated the basic rules of contemporary
civilized behavior!

Ha ha, Teacher Wu wanted to enlighten the
ignorant pro-democracy intellectuals. Instead he got surrounded and
beaten by the masses who don't know the truth. So he must be counted to
have made a sacrifice.

Fuck, he set up a fight date. He should
bear the consequences no matter how it turned out. Everybody has seen
the microblogs. He lost and he claimed to have been surrounded and
beaten in an organized fashion. That stupid cunt Wu got what he
deserved.

This is truly going too far. The most
basic requirement is to respect people and human life. You don't hurl
invectives or you shouldn't bother taking about democracy and freedom.
These people will trample upon democracy while seeking their own freedom.

A bunch of idiots who went berserk in the
name of democracy.

Throughout the whole incident, Wu Fatian was
consistent: he was non-violent; he looked for proof; he sought to obey the
law; he made no personal judgments. Some of the people on the other side
were inconsistent: they mouthed words like freedom-democracy-equality and then
swung their heavy fists. I don't think that he expected to leave
unscathed today. Why else would he have the scene recorded?

What is the difference between you people and
the Red Guards of the Cultural Revolution? The only difference is in the
teams.

Wu Fatian was really too naïve!

You can disagree with what I say, but I will
beat you up until you can't speak anymore!

I don't like naïve leftists such as Wu Fatian.
But based upon my limited observations, he showed more self-restraint,
tolerance and courage than these disgusting public intellectuals, and not just
by a little bit. To set up a trap because of a difference of views and
violently attack someone en masse is the true nature of the populism of these
public intellectuals.

At the moment when Wu Fatian was knocked down
on the ground, he won this round even though it was gratifying to hit someone.

Three thoughts on the Wu Fatian incident: (1)
Fake democracy and public intellectuals cannot be trusted. These people
are double-faced and can arouse many fools to be cannon fodder. We must
be wary about them. (2) When you set up a fight, you must bring your
allies and weapons. Different politics, different positions, different
class backgrounds mean that this is a life-or-death struggle. Put aside
all idle fantasies. (3) With respect to your political enemies, it must
be: "If I don't agree with your viewpoints, I will do everything possible to
deprive you of your speech rights!"

When leftists and rightists meet to fight in
front of so many spectators, this is something that hurts your friends and
pleases your enemies! For the interest groups, it was great that these
two bums got into a fight with each other! When the leftists fight the
rightists, the interest groups win and have less to worry about!
Countless numbers of people think that the main conflict is between leftists
and rightists, or that the clash between the leftist and rightist lines is
crucial. In truth, it is nothing like that! The biggest enemy of
the leftists, the rightists and the middle-of-the-roaders is the interest
groups.

The assault on Wu Fatian shows: (1) The
leftists are so naïve for not having seen that the rightists have lost their
minds. The leftists do not have a fighting strategy. (2) The
rightists are shameless. Just like the assault on Sima Nan last time,
they let a bitch come out first ad then some hooligans spring out in a trap.
Then they proclaimed a victory for democracy. Damn, they are shameless.
(3) If the storm is coming, then lightning will come too. Let us wait
and see how heaven and earth will rumble.

At 1pm this afternoon, it does not matter
whether you are man or women, it does not matter whether you praised or
advocated democracy, it does not matter whether you are a public intellectual
and opposed the establishment, you are an enemy of democracy and a traitor of
freedom if you took part in the assault on the so-called Fifty Cent Gang
member Wu Fatian. Your actions today will provide ample justification
for the righteous criticisms in tomorrow's edition of <Global Times>.

At 1pm on July 6 at the south gate entrance of Chaoyang
Park, Beijing, China Political and Law University associate professor Wu
Fatian was surrounded and beaten by twenty to thirty persons including
Sichuan TV's Beijing reporter Zhou Yan. The assault lasted almost 20
minutes. Afterwards many renowned scholars, media workers, law
professionals, entertainment celebrities and other so-called public
intellectuals expressed their views on microblogs. They twisted the
facts and lauded the assault. Apart from Tencent's "Topic of the Day,"
the other media reports and commentaries contained more or less
inaccuracies. The worst was NetEase's "The Other Side."
Fortunately, the history of the incident is documented by the microblogs,
including videos taken from different angles by the numerous eyewitnesses.
So we know the truth of the incident.

The public intellectuals thought that since Wu Fatian set
up an appointment with Zhou Yan for a fight, he deserved to be beaten up.
According to the microblog records, Zhou Yan has been saying on her
microblog since January 6 this year that she wants to beat up Wu Fatian.
On July 4, she asked Wu Fatian "to pick a location if you have the guts.
I won't slap you to death. Don't be a turtle who hides his head."
Wu Fatian selected the time and place, but he stated that he wanted "to
debate"; "discuss and understand the law"; "this is a verbal struggle, not a
physical struggle"; "I guarantee that it will be a rational debate, I
guarantee that there won't be a fight with a woman"; "all controversial
topics can be discussed"; "netizens can watch and videotape." On July
5, Zhou Yan posted on her microblog: "Very much welcome China Political and
Law University professor Wu Fatian to debate the law at South Gate (Main
Entrance), Chaoyang Park." That is, superficially she confirmed that
Wu Fatian wanted to debate the law. Maybe Zhou Yan thought that
"debate the law" is hidden code for "hold a brawl," but when Wu Fatian wrote
about the "guarantees" and "all controversial topics can be discussed," he
was not preparing for a fight. Even as the other party started to
assault him, he kept asking to debate and he never fought back. Before
he went there, he posted several times on his microblog that he was going to
debate. But the public intellectuals claimed that he changed his mind
once he saw that he was outnumbered by Zhou Yan's side.

According to NetEase's "The Other Side," Wu Fatian set up
the fight and then wanted to have a verbal debate instead of a physical
fight. Therefore Wu Fatian must bear major responsibility for changing
the substance of the contract. But even if Wu Fatian wanted to set up
a fight instead of a debate, he has the right to cancel the fight once he
got there. For example, if Wu Fatian and Zhou Yan set up a tryst but
Wu Fatian changed his mind once he saw her, does that mean Zhou Yan can rape
him and make him bear the major responsibility?

Taking a step back, even if Wu Fatian set up a fight with
Zhou Yan and this is irrevocable, then this is a matter between the two of
them. So how can the people that Zhou Yan brought with her and the
other spectators take the opportunity to assault Wu Fatian?

It is risible that Wu Fatian wanted to debate but Zhou
Yan's people said that they were not there to debate. Instead they
assaulted him. When the police showed up, these people changed their
tune and said that it was a debate and not a fight. When they got back
on the Internet, they changed their tune again and said that it was a fight
and not a debate.

The public intellectuals think that since Wu Fatian cursed
Zhou Yan as a "bitch," a man who insults a woman deserves to be beaten.
At the time Zhou Yan and the people with her all angrily asked why Wu Fatian
called her "bitch." Actually, Zhou Yan was the first to use obscene
language in cursing Wu Fatian and she used far more obscene insults.
On June 13, Wu Fatian criticized Li Chengpeng's essay on food safety and
Zhou Yan cursed him this way: "Wu Fatian looked like a runt who wants to be
cursed and slapped. It would be a waste of the stinking sperm that his
father ejaculated not to curse him." Thereafter she insulted Wu Fatian
as a "castrated man" and "useless material." Are women allowed to
curse men with obscene language, but men cannot rebut in kind? When
men rebut, do they deserve to be beaten up?

The public intellectuals think that Wu Fatian violated
Zhou Yan's privacy by posting photos of her on his microblog, and therefore
he deserves to be beaten up. Zhou Yan held Wu Fatian to account that
day at the scene. Actually, Zhou Yan had posted those photos on her
own microblog first, and Wu Fatian collected them for posting. Perhaps
Wu Fatian had malicious intent (according to Zhou Yan, Wu Fatian
concentrated on collecting those photos in which she looked bad). But
since Zhou Yan posted those photos onto the Internet herself, this is not an
invasion of privacy.

The public intellectuals think that Wu Fatian had said
that nobody died during the Great Leap Forward and the molybdenum-copper
alloy project in Shifang carried no pollution, so he deserved to be beaten.
Actually, Wu Fatian only said that nobody died in his village during the
Great Leap Forward and he never denied that many people died during the
Great Leap Forward. He re-posted the Shifang government's open letter
on the molybdenum-copper alloy project and he asked for help in rumor
busting and/or scientific assessment. He had his doubts and he sought
help in clarification. Even if Wu Fatian denied that anyone died
during the Great Leap Forward and claimed no pollution came from the
molybdenum-copper alloy project in Shifang, these are not reasons to beat
him up. Don't those experts who made the environmental impact
assessment for the molybdenum-copper alloy project in Shifang deserve more
to be beaten up?

The public intellectuals think that nobody hit Wu Fatian
and he faked falling down and being injured. This is inconsistent with
both what Zhou Yan said and what the videos show. Zhou Yan personally
posted on her microblog: "Two eggs in the face, three kicks in the back,
three kicks on the lower body." The videos showed Zhou Yan throwing an
egg in Wu Fatian's face, and kicked his lower body at least twice. Wu
Fatian was knocked down on the ground three times. After he fell down,
several persons rushed up to kick him. While debating with someone, a
woman in black sneaked behind him and kicked him. At the climax of the
incident, a "big bearded man" suddenly jumped out to hit Wu Fatian in the
face. There were loud cheers at the scene. A 16-year-old
middle-school student from Canada who said that he does not hit people
jumped out to grab Wu Fatian by the neck and wrestled him to the ground.
Someone in the crowd yelled "Strangle him to death! Strangle him to
death!" When the police showed up, the "big bearded man" took refuge
in the park while saying: "He won't dare to show up in daylight, fuck!"
The woman in black said: "Beat him to death next time!"

The public intellectuals think that Wu Fatian brought a
bodyguard with him. At the scene, one man was protecting Wu Fatian the
whole time. This man was hit in the back with a brick. Someone
said that he was Wu Fatian's bodyguard; some even said that he was a
plainclothes policeman. But this person later clarified on microblog
(Huyanglin717) later that he was a spectator who stood up to defend Wu
Fatian. He has been interviewed by the media, and he also been subject
to the human-flesh search by Wu Fatian's opponents. His work
information, home address and telephone number have been posted on the
Internet. This man is neither bodyguard nor plainclothes policeman.
And even if Wu Fatian was na

ïve
enough to bring one or two persons along with him, they were vastly
outnumbered by the people that Zhou Yan brought with her. I don't know
why the public intellectuals want to talk about this point.

NetEase's "The Other Side" not only
prettified the fight but it also prettified Luo Yonghao's threat to dump
feces on me. They said: "This is actually a rational decision, even a
courageous decision." "Why not if you balance defending your rights
against the legal consequences?" According to NetEase's position then,
all crimes are rational decisions, even courageous ones. I wonder if
the NetEase managers are willing to be beaten up and have feces dumped on
them? If they were attacked and had feces dumped on them, would they
still think that it was a rational and courageous decision?

Someone said that Wu Fatian set up a trap.
I don't know why he would want to entrap an unknown such as Zhou Yan.
Could he have known that famous pubic intellectuals such as "The Big Bearded
Man" and "Wuyuesanren" would be there? If Wu Fatian set up a trap,
then he not only fished out the violent nature of his attackers, but he also
fished out the bloodthirstiness and hypocrisy of the public intellectuals.
The microblog coming out under the name of "Han Han" typically realizes two
characteristics: distorting the facts and admiring the violence:

"A man insults a woman in public, and
gladly agrees to go to an appointment for a fight. Such a man deserves
to be beaten. Since this is World Kissing Day, he deserves to be
beaten even more so. This has nothing to do with public intellectuals,
democracy or the Cultural Revolution. There is no need to blame others
and falsely claim to be surrounded and beaten. Rolling on the ground
is the sure sign of someone faking it. It comes down simply to this:
he deserves to be beaten. This has nothing to do with democracy.
Even if you are Jiang Jingguo,
you deserve to be beaten."

When you have a verbal disagreement with
someone on the Internet, you call for the person to be beaten up. You
don't even spare the long-since-dead Jiang Jingguo. Obviously these
are "stinking public intellectuals" who have nothing to do with democracy
and law. Looking at a public incident that has so much written and
video evidence, the public intellectuals nevertheless make irresponsible
remarks. What would they say about incidents that are less
well-documented? Would anyone dare to believe what these public
intellectuals say hereafter?

With respect to his incident, I would like to
express some viewpoints.

(A) It is the totalitarian style of
ruling to apply force against persons with different views. As such,
this is the opposite of liberalism. Even if liberals have not promised
not to use force, the fact is that force is a final resort and only under
certain circumstances.

(B) Liberalism is related to character traits
such as objectivity, rationality and honesty. Regrettably the liberals
were not very objective in their evaluation of this incident. This is
manifested in:

1. They deliberately conceal the obscene and
provocative sentence that Zhou Yan used to trigger off the incident.

2. They deliberately presented the incident
as Wu Fatian setting up a fight with a woman. The fact is that Zhou Yan
made the proposal first and Wu Fatian named a location. Although an
intent to fight might be inferred, there is no clear statement to fight.

3. They behaved like rascals. Apart
from being sleazy about what was said and done during the incident, they were
the same in the comments. When they felt like it, they said "Good
trashing" and "Fifty Cent Gang persons deserved to be beaten up." When
they didn't feel like it, they said "Nobody got hit". They are
completely oblivious of the facts.

4. When they start losing the argument, they
bring up conspiracy theories. This is actually just embarrassing
themselves. After beating up Wu Fatian, they were giddy and they showed
off their feat. They acted as if this was a huge victory for freedom and
democracy. When they ran into stern criticisms, they said that this was
a minor matter that had nothing to do with freedom and democracy. When
they could not stem the criticisms, they bring up conspiracy theories.

First, they tried to divert attention by
coming up with a photo-illustrated case that Wu Fatian had the support of the
authorities and set the whole thing up. But apart from admitting that
you were stupid -- you were stupid but you tried to say that your opponent was
too crafty -- what else can that prove? Besides that analysis was mostly
subjective speculation. So a bunch of fans start cheering as if they had
just caught Wu Fatian in the act, but they are actually quite shameless.

Next,they said that Wu Fatian set things up.
But who instigated the incident? Could you have been fooled by your own
lies? How can such a description of events convince people?

Thirdly, they dared to act but they did not
dare to accept responsibility. When the police came, those active
participants just left their female fellow warrior on her own? How come
no one shared responsibility with her? They didn't have any sense of
justice and righteousness. When they gang-assaulted Wu Fatian, they were
righteous; when the police showed up, they were like mice in front of the cat.

Fourthly, they do not know how to reflect and
they take bad for good. In my view, this incident has serious blackened
the image of liberalism. In any case, this incident has made plenty of
room among public opinions for the forces that oppose liberalism and
democracy. Not only do they fail to reflect upon themselves, they went
ahead and treated all criticisms from those who follow liberalism and
democracy as also "Fifty Cent Gang"-talk and use extreme politically-correct
talk to pillory these critics.

Finally, I say, "Stop coming up with
conspiracy theories! This is too embarrassing! No matter whether
you were entrapped or not, you cannot cover up your own shame. You are
only making things worse."

In a potentially stunning turn of events, it
is alleged a meeting between two rival and high-profile microbloggers on Sina
Weibo at Chaoyang Park in Beijing turned violent on Friday. Rumors are
swirling that one of them, accompanied by 30 friends, beat the other over
their online spat.

Wu Danhong, 33, an assistant professor at China University of Political
Science and Law, and Zhou Yan, a female reporter from Sichuan Television
Station, agreed Thursday to meet at 1 pm Friday at the park to "settle" a spat
on Weibo.

Wu made a controversial post on Weibo on Tuesday saying that a molybdenum
copper plant project in Shifang, Sichuan Province, later cancelled after
protests, was not harmful to the environment, as molybdenum and copper are
necessary elements for the human body. Wu's opinion was lambasted online
including by Zhou Yan, who was supported by certain self-claimed democracy
activists.

Wu has been nicknamed by netizens as "the chief representative of the 50 cent
party," a pejorative unofficial term for Internet commentators hired by the
government to post comments that favor government policies and who are
reportedly paid 5 mao (50 cents) a post.

"Both Ai Weiwei and Yao Bo, a well-known columnist and affairs commentator
came," Wu told the Global Times on Friday. "About 30 or 40 people were with
Zhou Yan while I was alone." Wu then claimed that "Zhou Yan, Ai Weiwei and Yao
Bo beat me, and I suffered many cuts and bruises."

The Global Times reached Ai Weiwei by phone but the artist refused to comment.
A Weibo post by Zhou Yan saying that she threw two eggs at Wu's face and
kicked him was quickly deleted.

One netizen, Meng Haoran from Shanghai, confirmed some elements of the story.
He told the Global Times that he witnessed an altercation between Zhou and Wu
which turned violent, including Zhou pelting Wu with eggs. However, he did not
see either Ai or Yao take part in the fracas, adding that somebody was
protecting Wu and that the whole incident lasted 10 minutes until the police
arrived.

"I do not speak for the government and I just voice out my opinions. I do not
have a personal grudge towards Zhou and I had never met her before," Wu said.

Wu is considering taking legal action but this is not the first such incident.
Last October, a purported public settling of a spat with Yao Bo never happened
as both sides accused the other of fleeing the scene.

A bizarre brawl broke out between Wu Danhong, a law professor and blogger
under the name of Wu Fatian, and Zhou Yan, a journalist from Sichuan TV and
frequent critic of the authorities, in Chaoyang Park, Beijing, last Friday.
The crowd, mostly supporters of Zhou, cheered as she kicked and threw eggs at
Wu. Controversial artist Ai Weiwei was also present. Wu claims he only
intended to give a public lecture and wasn't expecting a fight. Global Times
invited two commentators to write about the incident.

Graceless
brawls degrade name of public intellectuals

By Zhou Sitian

When I saw the video showing Wu Danhong being
beaten up by a group of people, as onlookers cheered, I was reminded of the
scene when the red guards were spreading chaos across the country some 40
years ago during the Cultural Revolution (1966-76).

At that time, supposed "rightists" were labeled as counter-revolutionaries and
attacked while nowadays, pro-government bloggers known as the "50 cents party"
(referring to the 5 mao reportedly paid by the government to fake posters)
face fierce insults online and may even be physically attacked, as in this
instance.

It is astonishing that the two main figures in the issue are a professor of
law and a journalist. Freedom of speech is regarded as basic common sense both
in the law and media. Given their professions, Wu and Zhou should have a
better understanding that the right to speak should be defended.

But although the issue is a personal incident between Wu and Zhou, it reflects
recurring problems among Chinese intellectuals.

The popularity of Weibo, China's microblogging service, has greatly expanded
the participation of pubic intellectuals in social affairs. Many public
intellectuals have gained their own popularity through commenting on hot
issues on Weibo. In order to attract followers, public intellectuals advanced
unique and eye-catching ideas. They even fight with each other while their
followers queue to support them.

For example, in the flame war between Fang Zhouzi, an anti-fraud campaigner,
and best-selling author Han Han early this year, the two celebrities weren't
the only parties involved. People found a vicarious sense of satisfaction
through being involved in the fight between two well-known public
intellectuals.

This incident is much more severe than Fang and Han's fight. The irrational
sentiments of the public have been stimulated, which resulted in the
confrontation between the two camps.

Public intellectuals, especially with an academic background, should have a
critical spirit and the proper values to help the public and improve society.

And they should promote social rationality through their own actions. Those
public intellectuals who only aim at attracting attention are in fact public
entertainers. They should stop misusing the name of public intellectuals,
otherwise, the term will become a purely derogatory one.

Manichean values weaken purpose of public discourse

By Peng Xiaoyun

The rapid development of the Internet,
particularly the rising popularity of social networking sites, has provided
people with an open domain to discuss public affairs.

However, we haven't been educated as to how to participate in proper
discussion. Since childhood, we've been told Manichean fairytales about how
there are "good guys" and the "bad guys."

And when we discuss public affairs and politics on the Internet, we are often
dominated by our own political correctness, believing that criticizing the
authority is always morally right while defending it is always morally wrong.

For instance, by using political labels like "50 cents party," one group of
people can easily disqualify those with different opinions from participating
in a discussion and cancel their ideas' legitimacy.

In this playground scrap between Wu Danhong and Zhou Yan, with figures like Ai
Weiwei on the sidelines, people were predominately influenced by their
political stances and made their judgments purely based on their own existing
prejudices.

They labeled Wu as a "50 cents party member," and thus claimed that Wu's
defeat was "just," and that he "deserved to be punished." Their rhetoric
reminds me exactly of the class warfare in the old days.

Yet the duel was triggered over a discussion of the Shifang factory project.
Wu's view on the seriousness of the factory's pollution somehow offended Zhou.
They had a fierce debate about the issue, but the online discussion eventually
ended up with a real fight.

Whatever our differences, we need to be mutually respectful so that our
discussion can be carried out within a proper frame and manner.

Mutual respect requires more than tolerance, as it asks people of different
ideas to show appreciation of others' thoughts. This can help put aside
conflicts and enable the coexistence and exchange of divided ideologies.

Unfortunately, for people who can't even decide which moral conflicts can be
respected, asking them to become mutually respectful to different ideas is too
difficult. They cannot tolerate doubt of their stance.

This indicates that our society lacks respect for different opinions. To avert
this, we need adjustment to both our system and our own individual mindset to
provide a more tolerant environment for different opinions.

VoxPop

@yaowuyun

The people involved in the incident are all intellectuals who have received
good education. But their poor tempers and lack of emotional intelligence have
really shocked me. It seems our education system has only taught them how to
survive, but nothing about social morality.

@ranyunfei

Building up a democratic society isn't about setting up a set of high moral
standards, but a set of appropriate rules that the public can recognize and
agree with. Thus, the whole logic of idolizing people who call for democracy
and demanding they become morally flawless, then blaming them for failing to
achieve those high standards and accusing democracy of being a failure is
completely groundless. And if people switch views because of this, it only
shows they lack faith.

@routangseng

Whatever society an individual is with, the obligation of a citizen should
always be honored. This is especially the case for liberals. However, even
though some people who participated in the mass brawl in Chaoyang Park claimed
that they are liberals, they unfairly overwhelmed one man and physically
assaulted him. And they just escaped when the police arrived, leaving a woman
to shoulder all responsibility. What kind of liberals are they? Where is their
sense of responsibility? Where are their obligations and duties?

(FT.com)
When the virtual world enters the real realm – Chinese style
July 9, 2012.

In China, as is doubtless the case elsewhere,
the distinction between online and offline is blurring. That presents the
Communist party with a potentially dangerous problem. Online comment can serve
a useful official function, allowing people to blow off steam and giving them
the impression of freedom of expression. So long as it never leaves the realms
of hyperspace, no harm done.

Of course, protesters are also using sites
like Weibo, China’s equivalent of Twitter, to organise demonstrations and
share information that might stimulate others to act in the real world. A
semi-farcical incident last Friday – a rumble in Beijing’s Chaoyang Park –
illustrates the point in miniature.

The strange case of Wu Danhong, a 33-year-old
assistant professor at the China University of Political Science and Law who
blogs under the name of Wu Fatian, starts with an online spat. Mr Wu is
derided by many online as the “chief representative of the 50-cent party”, a
derogatory expression referring to those allegedly hired by the Communist
party to make posts attacking protesters and dissidents. Mr Wu founded the
“rumour-busting alliance”, dedicated to debunking anti-government myths flying
around the internet.

As a result of his online activities, Mr Wu
has become involved in a number of online brawls with China’s lively netizens,
many of whom accuse him of being a government apologist and helping to cover
up inconvenient truths. But last Friday that online fight was transported from
the virtual to the real world when one of the objects of Mr Wu’s attacks
challenged him to an offline debate in Beijing’s Chaoyang Park.

Mr Wu’s adversary was Zhou Yan, a
liberal-leaning journalist who has written approvingly about the demonstrators
in Shifang, in the southern province of Sichuan, who last week persuaded the
local authorities to back down on plans to build a metals refinery. In online
commentary, Mr Wu used a very unkind word to describe Ms Zhou and suggested
that demonstrators’ claims about the plant’s environmental dangers were
unfounded. Molybdenum and copper were necessary elements for the human body,
he wrote reassuringly.

That’s when the online slanging match entered
a different realm, in what used to be called “real life”. Ms Zhou challenged
Mr Wu to meet her in Chaoyang Park and to have it out in an old-fashioned
verbal debate. As this video shows both turned up – Ms Zhou with several noisy
supporters – and a vigorous exchange ensued. Even non-Chinese speakers will
readily appreciate that the two sides were not exactly seeing eye-to-eye.
There was much shouting and not a little shoving.

Fast forward 12 minutes and 55 seconds and a
bearded, hulk of a man – like an internet troll made flesh and blood – steps
forward and roughly pulls Mr Wu’s ear, before retreating. The bearded giant in
question is none other than Ai Weiwei, the dissident artist who spends much of
his time online. Mr Ai’s sudden appearance has the look of some bizarre video
game.

Naturally, all the participants had their
iPhones out and filmed the confrontation from all possible angles. Equally
naturally, the whole thing has now gone viral, re-entering the virtual world –
whence it came.

The "brawl" set the country's blogosphere
alight, was seized upon by state media, and underlined the increasingly
polarised online debate over democracy, human rights and the rule of law.

The confrontation took place last Friday in
Beijing's Chaoyang Park and involved Ai Weiwei, the dissident and world-famous
artist, and Wu Danhong, a 33-year-old university professor, who online
activists accuse of being a government stooge, paid to post pro-Beijing
messages online. Zhou Yan, a Chinese journalist, and Yao Bo, a writer,
restaurateur and pro-democracy activist, were also present.

Details of the so-called Chaoyang "Rumble in
the Jungle" are sketchy but the "brawl" appears to have been sparked last week
when a feud between rival bloggers erupted over comments Mr Wu made on Weibo,
China's version of Twitter, relating to the controversial construction of a
copper refinery in Sichuan province. A heated debate between Mr Wu and Ms Zhou
ensued and the two agreed to settle their differences the following day in
Chaoyang Park. Several dozen other online activists accompanied Ms Zhou. At
some point the rendezvous turned violent. Accusations, swear words and,
according to one report, eggs flew.

One online video showed Mr Wu, reviled by
many activists as a member of the "50 cent Party" – bloggers who are paid to
publicly promote government policy – lying on the ground surrounded by a
crowd. Another showed Mr Ai being cheered on. In an interview with the Global
Times, Mr Wu alleged he was set upon by Mr Ai, Mr Yao and Ms Zhou.

Speaking to the Daily Telegraph, Mr Ai
confirmed he had been present but denied attacking Mr Wu. "It makes no sense
to lie. I did not beat him," he said. "The crowd called my name when I
approached and Wu panicked a little bit when he saw me. He walked a few steps
and fell over. There were a few people standing by his side protecting him. "I
only pulled his ear saying, 'Who is this?' for less than a second because his
ear was quite slippery," added the 55-year-old. "I'm not the kind of person to
beat people up."

Mr Yao also denied involvement.

Mr Wu, from the China University of Political
Science and Law, said he had arranged to meet rival bloggers for a "verbal
fight, not a physical one"and had turned up "alone, without helpers [and]
without weapons." "A dozen people laid their hands on me. I also got kicked in
the back by Zhou, Ai Weiwei and some [other] guys. I never expected that such
a thing would happen," he added, claiming Ms Zhou had broken his umbrella in
half. Mr Wu denied being paid to post
positive comments about the government online. "Who can prove [that]? Is there
any evidence?"

The altercation was seized on by
state-controlled media. In an editorial the Global Times claimed the incident
had humiliated "all Chinese cyber intellectuals." "Physical fighting over
conflicting political thoughts is the most vulgar behaviour yet carried out by
a few online intellectuals," it said. "Resolving political disputes should be
done in a civilised manner."

At 1 p.m. on July 6, two well-known Chinese
microbloggers arrived at the south gate of Beijing’s Chaoyang Park to settle
their differences. The encounter was publicly pre-arranged on Sina Weibo,
China’s most popular microblog.

No (uniformed) police arrived, despite the
fact that in the 48 hours after
the challenge
was issued and accepted, the event's details were re-tweeted thousands of
times on Chinese microblogs.

It was an inevitable clash, with the parties
representing either side of China’s deepest online partisan divide: those who
allegedly blog on behalf of the government and those who allegedly debate free
of any taint. The former group is known pejoratively as “the
50-Cent Party,” or 50-Centers, an Anglicization of the .5
yuan ($0.08)
fee they are rumored
to
receive for each pro-government post or tweet. (Though the name has stuck,
several government agencies have denied that this is their actual salary.) One
doesn’t need to be in the employ of the government to be a 50-Center -- it’s
enough to simply act like it. Of those who act like it, few are more reviled
than
Wu Danhong, a 33-year-old professor at Beijing University of Political
Science and Law, who blogs under the handle
Wu Fa Tian and
denies he's paid by the government. Even the pro-government Global Times
newspaper publishes the sneering occasional nickname
China’s
microbloggers have given Wu:
“chief representative" of the 50-Cent Party.

Wu takes every opportunity to defend or
rehabilitate the government or to advance a pro-Party line. Last year, he
helped form an online Anti-Rumor League primarily concerned with debunking
antigovernment
gossip. More recently, he questioned the widely-circulated suggestion that
30 million Chinese people died of starvation during Mao’s Great Leap Forward
in the late 1950s and early 1960s. He went so far as to set up a poll where
netizens could vote on a variety of
mortality estimates.

And then, early last week, he aggressively
supported
the construction of a controversial copper and molybdenum refining plant.
Concerns about pollution sparked
protests in Sichuan province, and by mid-week, the local government gave
in and halted construction. That still didn’t erase the memory of Wu’s tweets,
one of which
pointed out that copper and molybdenum occur naturally in the human body,
and thus maybe the copper-molybdenum plant wouldn’t be a polluter, after all.

Wu’s support for the refinery caught the
attention of Sichuan TV reporter Zhou Yan, who had recently gained a following
for her empathetic coverage and tweets about the protests. In a set of tweets
that quickly escalated into insults, she and Wu attacked what they
characterized as each other’s
ignorance. The
exchange (many tweets have since been deleted, making the full narrative
difficult to reconstruct) culminated on July 5, with the two parties agreeing
to settle their differences in
Chaoyang Park.

It is not clear what precisely was to be
accomplished in Chaoyang Park. Zhao doesn’t indicate much more than a desire
to do something about Wu’s “big mouth.” Wu is not so restrained. Tweeting on
his Sina Weibo account shortly after accepting the challenge to the rumble,
the professor
announced: “Let the scum take heed: law-fearing people aren’t alone
anymore and those who break the law have reason to fear.”

If Zhou was intimidated by Wu’s antics, she
did not cower. According to a
video of the entire encounter (there are several
others that offer different angles) that has circulated widely on the
Chinese Internet, she showed up at the south gate of Chaoyang Park with what
appear to be some 20 friends to back her up. Wu, on the other hand, seems to
have arrived with two friends (at least, that’s how many people whisk him away
at the end of the video) -- not a very scholarly approach to gang warfare.

Perhaps emboldened by her sizable posse --
and the dozens of cell phone cameras deployed in and around the perimeter of
said rumble -- the diminutive Zhou attacks with her umbrella (which she then
flings aside) and then slaps the professor on the face. He responds with a
slap at her midriff before somebody pulls her away.

What happens next is a matter of controversy.
In some
videos, an unidentified man in a white shirt appears to rush up and
strikes Wu so hard he hits the ground -- though other camera angles -- and
bloggers -- suggest Wu took a melodramatic
dive. Nobody, however, disputes how this opening round is finished off:
Somebody rushes up and lands a kick on the 50-cent professor’s rear
end.

At this point, Wu’s friends -- if they can be
called that -- decide to step in and protect him. The rumble evolves into a
debate on Wu’s ethics, Zhou’s ethics and whether morality trumps the law --
all salted with a rich selection of Beijing profanity.

This goes on for over 10 minutes until, quite
suddenly, a bearded gnome-like figure -- better known as the
artist,
activist and provocateur
Ai Weiwei -- enters the picture and makes a grab for Professor Wu’s ear.
The crowd howls, delighted at the appearance of the international celebrity,
and then does its best to restrain him from taking off Wu’s head. It’s not
easy: Ai raises his arm, threatening to tomahawk the spectacled professor with
what looks like a smart phone. When he realizes he can’t get close enough to
do it, he breaks away from his impromptu guards, makes an end run around the
crowd and dashes after Wu, who is in full retreat with his friends. Ai is
twice restrained in the process.

Ai, too, has a history with Wu Danhong and
the 50-cent crowd. Last August, after Ai was released from an
81-day detention for alleged
tax
evasion (though it was widely believed to be in connection with his
activism and recent protests), Wu offered an interview to the Global Times,
the nationalistic offspring of the official Communist Party mouthpiece,
People’s Daily. His quote, and the paper’s commentary, was consistent with
what other 50-Centers were saying -- and continue to say -- about
Ai:

‘Ai's case has been used by the
Westerners,’ Wu Danhong, an assistant professor at the China University of
Political Science and Law, told the Global Times. Wu is another critic who
says Ai may be in cahoots with an unseen international conspiracy. ‘By
condemning China's repression of dissidents in the name of democracy,
foreign countries that don't want a stronger China intentionally attempt to
descend China into turmoil by hyping Ai's case.’

Was that the reason Ai looked ready to rip
off Wu Danhong’s ear? There’s no way to tell. Nonetheless, when interviewed
this week by the U.K.’s
Daily
Telegraph, Ai
downplayed his role in the fight (to the point of contradicting video
evidence): “I’m not the kind of person to beat people up.”

For all his antics, Ai is obviously aware
that many of his supporters -- especially overseas ones -- will be
uncomfortable with evidence that he behaved violently toward one of his
critics. That is not, after all, how internationally renowned dissidents are
supposed to go about their business. A brief scan of the thousands of tweets
on Sina Weibo in the wake of the park incident (it's been a top trending topic
for most of the last five days), reveals a Chinese public willing to forgive
this transgression, if only because it involves Wu Danhong. “Beating someone
up is wrong,” tweeted a microblogger in
Hangzhou,
an affluent city in Zhejiang province. “But beating up Wu is an exception.
Fatty Ai [a nickname used for Ai because his name is a censored term on Sina
Weibo] is so handsome.” A microblogger in
Fujian
province echoed that sentiment: “Fatty Ai looked so happy, but beating
others is not right. Of course, if you want to beat him [Wu], that’s OK.”

First, the problem is a breach in the
social fabric, and Weibo is just an amplifier of it. Hostility was fomented
online and then came to life in reality. The gap between rich and poor, the
different class positions, different ideological positions, and identities
were divided and then sharpened into irreconcilable differences. The two
parties have obviously different class positions, factions, and viewpoints.
They didn’t fight for themselves, but for the factions they represent.

For now, the only faction that appears to
have suffered from the battle is the one represented by Zhou Yan, the
journalist. According to the Beijing Cream
blog, she’s rumored to be spending five days in detention. Meanwhile, Wu
Danhong remains free to tweet. As for Ai Weiwei, he was last seen Friday
afternoon, taking a stroll in Chaoyang Park.